How are research findings presented,discussed and interpreted?

Answer 1

Research findings should be presented in an unbiased way (almost impossible since everyone brings their own opinion to their research no matter how hard you try to avoid it) and should be clear and concise. You should typically assume your audience is new to the subject and give a brief high-level overview of the background of your topic, but not too much because you will bore your experienced readers. Interpretation should only be made after research has been done to validate someone else's theory- in other words, don't just take things at face value.

Answer 2

They usually are written up and submitted to a science magazine as fact with the method used to arrive at their conclusion. Other scientists who are working on the same thing try the method explained in the paper and if they have the same result then it becomes accepted. If the result is different then there is a lot of controversy over the validity of the research findings.

Answer 3

I believe it is always presented with a hidden agenda, the reasons for most studies, and are funded by someone looking or hoping for particular results.So that is why I don't buy into the unbiased opinion theory, if you deal with people you will always get a biased opinion. So the next time someone says it's preffered by 1out of 3 you should question the three and what their interests are. That's my take on it.